Short and Asian for men is pretty much the kiss of death for dating in America

[studentp0x]

So what are steps I can take to find myself in the same position as your friend? If you don't mind, give me concrete steps of what I have to do instead of generalized platitutdes

1) Get a proper evaluation of your face. This will determine what sorts of girls you'll have have a chance with. If you're a plain 5/10 then go for average looking girls only.

2) Acquire a muscular body, since it helps a lot.

3) Go for girls who are equal to you in height or shorter than you. But wear lifts! 2 inch lifts in your shoes should do it.. but dont go for girls who are taller than your real height.

4) Play the numbers game to a large extent. You may need to approach 50+ women to be successful.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Seth Joo]

So what are steps I can take to find myself in the same position as your friend? If you don't mind, give me concrete steps of what I have to do instead of generalized platitutdes

Well what exactly are you looking for? Marriage? I think I matching service can help you a lot, there are a lot of busy professionals who do not have time to go out and meet people, these people can help you find potential prospects for dating.

Have a positive attitude, try to build a hobby, you might meet more people that way as well. Join a religious organization, my current girlfriend, I met at church.

What part of the country are you located? That might play a factor as well.

If you really self conscious about your height, try wearing lifts.

It also about numbers, you have to approach a lot of people. I think this is why a matchmaking service can be helpful.

 

[bobow98]

Short Doc, I realize you may have had it rough out there with the women. But you have to play the hand you're dealt in life, and if you don't have pocket aces well sometimes you have to bluff the **** out of the table. Step 1 would be to acquire the pokerface ie get yourself well groomed, go to brooks brothers (factory outlet sales recommended), and buy some nice clothes to look "fresh." You also should start hitting that gym. You don't have to be Jay Cutler or Ronnie Coleman, you'd just scare most girls away, but you sure as hell can help yourself by looking like you take care of yourself.

Everyone keeps pointing to your attitude. You say well if I try all this and it still doesn't work I'll feed bad. Well seems like you already feel bad. How much worse can you really feel? Do you think you need antidepressants and hot lines? Would it get that bad? I really hope not. I would echo others' sentiments and say you shouldn't just give up.

To succeed with your not optimal hand, you now have to actually play that hand. Others have said approach women (I think I saw 50+). This doesn't mean go to a club and cold approach. It means live your life and be friendly, say hello, smile for every little reason you can think of. Having a positive attitude draws people to you. Not saying that you do this, but there is no need to start thinking immediately about how you can bed every female that approaches you (this is surely what I thought when I was 16 due to hormones probably). If someone intrigues you, ask them about their lives, and find the things that really are interesting to you. Sometimes people just don't click. No need to force connections. There are lots of people around you.

I wish you luck OP. It's definitely difficult when you don't have classical features of biological dominance like size and also have some implicit bias working against you. However, people are not going to break down your struggles for you in real life - they only see what's in front of them. Are you a funny, fit, well dressed doctor? Or a mopey, sullen brick of a personality who isn't really in shape and slouches? The beauty of this life lies within our struggle with death and the forces that want to cease our human existance. Will you survive? Or will you (figuratively) perish?

 

[MirrorTodd]

This thread belongs on bodybuilding.com lol
OP move to SF, LA (as close to UCLA as possible), or Hawaii. There will be plenty of short asian girls for you to date there.

 

[Seth Joo]

This thread belongs on bodybuilding.com lol
OP move to SF, LA (as close to UCLA as possible), or Hawaii. There will be plenty of short asian girls for you to date there.

Broke and poor is the true kiss of death for dating in America.

 

[bobow98]

Broke and poor is the true kiss of death for dating in America.

More like broke and fat lol...

 

[Seth Joo]

More like broke and fat lol...

Apparently being bald is not much of an issue. Contrary to what the hair club people say.

I really do think money is an issue in the dating scene, more so than looks and height, I have even read surveys that show most females seem to heavily consider a potential mate's earning ability, more than their appearance and height. Men seem to be the opposite, tend to value looks and appearance over earning ability.

 

[studentp0x]

Broke and poor is the true kiss of death for dating in America.

Reality is that it's all about your face and everything else is a far distant second. Money will help you date/marry a much more attractive girl who will then cheat on you with better looking guys. Also keep in mind they're all gold diggers... not decent women.

The guys I know who get the most girls are semi-broke, have decent bodies, very average heights and decent personalities (nothing special). The one thing they all have in common? Attractive faces.
Meanwhile I know doctors/lawyers/profs/business people/rich kids who cannot date above their own league facewise at all.

The whole obsession with money/success for women is stupid anyways. It'll help you within your own league... period. Same goes for height, body, personality etc. In fact all my females friends always say they value personality the most and dont care about look until I insist that they're just saying that then they'll be like "oh fine you're right, if i dont like a guy's face then yea there isnt much to go on."

I'm not saying anyone in this thread is ugly, its possible that everyone actually has a solid face. But im just making a general point about society/dating. PUAs have scammed so many people using the "confidence/personality" nonsense and sold the "looks dont matter" lie only... feel it's time that stuff got thrown out.

If you push this topic with any female in discussion, pretty much every single one will say the exact same thing. It's just that girls like to sugar coat it so they dont seem shallow.. which makes no sense anyway cause it's illogical to like someone you arent attracted to.

 

[Seth Joo]

Reality is that it's all about your face and everything else is a far distant second. Money will help you date/marry a much more attractive girl who will then cheat on you with better looking guys. Also keep in mind they're all gold diggers... not decent women.

The guys I know who get the most girls are semi-broke, have decent bodies, very average heights and decent personalities (nothing special). The one thing they all have in common? Attractive faces.
Meanwhile I know doctors/lawyers/profs/business people/rich kids who cannot date above their own league facewise at all.

The whole obsession with money/success for women is stupid anyways. It'll help you within your own league... period. Same goes for height, body, personality etc. In fact all my females friends always say they value personality the most and dont care about look until I insist that they're just saying that then they'll be like "oh fine you're right, if i dont like a guy's face then yea there isnt much to go on."

I'm not saying anyone in this thread is ugly, its possible that everyone actually has a solid face. But im just making a general point about society/dating. PUAs have scammed so many people using the "confidence/personality" nonsense and sold the "looks dont matter" lie only... feel it's time that stuff got thrown out.

If you push this topic with any female in discussion, pretty much every single one will say the exact same thing. It's just that girls like to sugar coat it so they dont seem shallow.. which makes no sense anyway cause it's illogical to like someone you arent attracted to.

The whole idea of true love is very dated. People use each other, its sad but true. True love is very very rare.

 

[touchpause13]

The whole idea of true love is very dated. People use each other, its sad but true. True love is very very rare.

Cry me a river

 

[Seth Joo]

Cry me a river

I wasn't crying, true love is very rare.

 

[studentp0x]

The whole idea of true love is very dated. People use each other, its sad but true. True love is very very rare.

I do agree. But my point was that success in dating is largely based on your face. Cmon @touchpause13 I know you agree.

 

[touchpause13]

I do agree. But my point was that success in dating is largely based on your face. Cmon @touchpause13 I know you agree.

I think that having a nice face makes a big difference. Obviously that's one of the first things you notice about people, and if your face looks like this all the time

well you probably aren't going to have a lot of luck no matter what the rest of you looks like.

 

[touchpause13]

I wasn't crying, true love is very rare.

No you are just being a boring pessimist again. Yawn

 

[Mad Jack]

Reality is that it's all about your face and everything else is a far distant second. Money will help you date/marry a much more attractive girl who will then cheat on you with better looking guys. Also keep in mind they're all gold diggers... not decent women.

The guys I know who get the most girls are semi-broke, have decent bodies, very average heights and decent personalities (nothing special). The one thing they all have in common? Attractive faces.
Meanwhile I know doctors/lawyers/profs/business people/rich kids who cannot date above their own league facewise at all.

The whole obsession with money/success for women is stupid anyways. It'll help you within your own league... period. Same goes for height, body, personality etc. In fact all my females friends always say they value personality the most and dont care about look until I insist that they're just saying that then they'll be like "oh fine you're right, if i dont like a guy's face then yea there isnt much to go on."

I'm not saying anyone in this thread is ugly, its possible that everyone actually has a solid face. But im just making a general point about society/dating. PUAs have scammed so many people using the "confidence/personality" nonsense and sold the "looks dont matter" lie only... feel it's time that stuff got thrown out.

If you push this topic with any female in discussion, pretty much every single one will say the exact same thing. It's just that girls like to sugar coat it so they dont seem shallow.. which makes no sense anyway cause it's illogical to like someone you arent attracted to.

The research doesn't really bear out your claims though.

http://www.ibtimes.com/love-marriage-wifes-attractiveness-essential-study-says-1479434
http://www.livescience.com/7483-beautiful-women-marry-attractive-men.html
http://elitedaily.com/women/hot-girls-date-less-attractive/728378/

 

[studentp0x]

The research doesn't really bear out your claims though.

http://www.ibtimes.com/love-marriage-wifes-attractiveness-essential-study-says-1479434
http://www.livescience.com/7483-beautiful-women-marry-attractive-men.html
http://elitedaily.com/women/hot-girls-date-less-attractive/728378/

"But other psychologists are a bit skeptical about the claim that a man’s looks matter much less than a woman’s in heterosexual relationships. Other research that examines a variety of relationships, from marriage to nonmarried couples to speed-dating participants, has suggested that the sexes place pretty much equal importance on looks in their romantic partners."

Things you didnt factor in:

1) Fidelity

- As you said yourself, half of women cheat. A lot of these marriages have hidden cheating going on even though everything seems perfect

2) Quality of the women

- who's in these polls? single moms looking for a provider? average income women looking for someone to provide some social mobility?

3) Who's "rating" these men?

- sure hope it's women rating how attractive these men were and not other men...


The issues with these claims about looks not mattering is that its simply nonsense. I see unattractive/average guys get turned down at the bar/club over and over again no matter how good their personality is while better looking guys can easily get numbers/pick up.
Often "that guy" who isnt the best looking and is good with women has a "rugged" masculine look that men think is unattractive which confuses them when women like him.

As well your attention should be on who girls go for in their prime years, not once their looks have started to fade. Hence why marriage isnt the best thing to look at unless it's younger couples.

 

[Seth Joo]

"But other psychologists are a bit skeptical about the claim that a man’s looks matter much less than a woman’s in heterosexual relationships. Other research that examines a variety of relationships, from marriage to nonmarried couples to speed-dating participants, has suggested that the sexes place pretty much equal importance on looks in their romantic partners."

Things you didnt factor in:

1) Fidelity

- As you said yourself, half of women cheat. A lot of these marriages have hidden cheating going on even though everything seems perfect

2) Quality of the women

- who's in these polls? single moms looking for a provider? average income women looking for someone to provide some social mobility?

3) Who's "rating" these men?

- sure hope it's women rating how attractive these men were and not other men...


The issues with these claims about looks not mattering is that its simply nonsense. I see unattractive/average guys get turned down at the bar/club over and over again no matter how good their personality is while better looking guys can easily get numbers/pick up.
Often "that guy" who isnt the best looking and is good with women has a "rugged" masculine look that men think is unattractive which confuses them when women like him.

As well your attention should be on who girls go for in their prime years, not once their looks have started to fade. Hence why marriage isnt the best thing to look at unless it's younger couples.

Women have a more complicated idea of "attractive" compared to men, we men are also use a woman's looks to gauge their desirability.

There are many examples of men who do not fit the "classic handsome" male model who are very popular with women.

The latest James Bond actor is interesting, because so many women consider Daniel Craig to a super sexy, he is not handsome in a classic sense, particularly his face, and he is the shortest actor to portray Bond, but he is constantly raved about in women's magazines. Maybe its the fact he has a very mesomorphic body.

I honestly thought Daniel Craig is ugly but I am a guy and I am straight.

 

[Mad Jack]

"But other psychologists are a bit skeptical about the claim that a man’s looks matter much less than a woman’s in heterosexual relationships. Other research that examines a variety of relationships, from marriage to nonmarried couples to speed-dating participants, has suggested that the sexes place pretty much equal importance on looks in their romantic partners."

Things you didnt factor in:

1) Fidelity

- As you said yourself, half of women cheat. A lot of these marriages have hidden cheating going on even though everything seems perfect

2) Quality of the women

- who's in these polls? single moms looking for a provider? average income women looking for someone to provide some social mobility?

3) Who's "rating" these men?

- sure hope it's women rating how attractive these men were and not other men...


The issues with these claims about looks not mattering is that its simply nonsense. I see unattractive/average guys get turned down at the bar/club over and over again no matter how good their personality is while better looking guys can easily get numbers/pick up.
Often "that guy" who isnt the best looking and is good with women has a "rugged" masculine look that men think is unattractive which confuses them when women like him.

As well your attention should be on who girls go for in their prime years, not once their looks have started to fade. Hence why marriage isnt the best thing to look at unless it's younger couples.

I was just saying so far as marriage success, looks don't matter. Try and find any data to the contrary, you'll find that men's looks consistently do not matter, while women's actually do. Most people's ultimate goal in dating is a happy marriage, therefore dating success would equate to a happy marriage. Marriage fidelity is strongly correlated with marriage happiness, so it can be inferred that these happier marriages are also marriages in which there is greater fidelity.

In casual dating, people tend to gravitate towards those that are equally attractive. This would tend to infer that men would be more successful, on average, in venues in which the women's level of attractiveness most closely matches their own.

Finally, all discussions of "dating success" sort of hinge on what one means by "success" in dating. If success is a successful and loving relationship, then personality is by far the most important thing. No amount of having a decent looking face is going to fix a guy's insanity/insecurity/emotional issues/boring nature and keep a girl around. Hence why, for those of us that are looking for love, personality is by far the most important trait in a partner.

 

[studentp0x]

Women have a more complicated idea of "attractive" compared to men, we men are also use a woman's looks to gauge their desirability.

There are many examples of men who do not fit the "classic handsome" male model who are very popular with women.

Absolutely. There are the "cute" pretty boy types, the charming types, the rough/rugged types, masculine, etc. All of those have faces that women find attractive though.

 

[Seth Joo]

Absolutely. There are the "cute" pretty boy types, the charming types, the rough/rugged types, masculine, etc. All of those have faces that women find attractive though.

Daniel Craig would probably be masculine rugged type, but he has one of the ugliest faces I have ever seen. He might be blonde, but he has a receding hairline.

Josh Hutcherson, who plays Peeta Mellark, is another one, but he seems to fit none of the categories, he is also real short.

You also have Justin Bieber, I never understood why he is so popular with the ladies.

Here is a photo of Craig next to Hugh Jackman who is the classic handsome guy:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...iel-Craig-sports-handlebar-look-new-play.html

 

[studentp0x]

I was just saying so far as marriage success, looks don't matter. Try and find any data to the contrary, you'll find that men's looks consistently do not matter, while women's actually do. Most people's ultimate goal in dating is a happy marriage, therefore dating success would equate to a happy marriage. Marriage fidelity is strongly correlated with marriage happiness, so it can be inferred that these happier marriages are also marriages in which there is greater fidelity.

In casual dating, people tend to gravitate towards those that are equally attractive. This would tend to infer that men would be more successful, on average, in venues in which the women's level of attractiveness most closely matches their own.

Finally, all discussions of "dating success" sort of hinge on what one means by "success" in dating. If success is a successful and loving relationship, then personality is by far the most important thing. No amount of having a decent looking face is going to fix a guy's insanity/insecurity/emotional issues/boring nature and keep a girl around. Hence why, for those of us that are looking for love, personality is by far the most important trait in a partner.

So in other words women will sleep with/date the attractive guys along with the hypergamy effect during their prime years... then once their looks fade (aging) and they want to get married they will go for a successful guy that has a good personality as well. I definitely agree with that.

I've seen a lot of women directly agree with this. Looks matter A LOT when you're under 30... especially under 25. Then as you age it matters less and less while success/personality matters more.

But again, who is rating these women/men? Whenever I hear of examples of "looks mismatched" couples it's an average guy with a slightlyyy above average woman, which makes perfect sense . I very rarely see someone who's plain average with a really hot gf/wife, the times I have is when the girl was a full out gold digger.

As for the love thing... attraction is what creates that bond initially. Personality strengthens it. Once it is strengthened then looks stop mattering. Well at least in theory it should... it disgusts me when someone becomes disabled in some way and the spouse leaves them.

 

[studentp0x]

Daniel Craig would probably be masculine rugged type, but he has one of the ugliest faces I have ever seen. He might be blonde, but he has a receding hairline.

Josh Hutcherson, who plays Peeta Mellark, is another one, but he seems to fit none of the categories, he is also real short.

You also have Justin Bieber, I never understood why he is so popular with the ladies.

Here is a photo of Craig next to Hugh Jackman who is the classic handsome guy:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...iel-Craig-sports-handlebar-look-new-play.html

Yea there are plenty of men who have that look which appeals to women. We arent wired to consider that attractive but many women are. So whenever I hear of an "ugly" guy being used as an example of why looks don't matter... they always fit that profile!

 

[Mad Jack]

So in other words women will sleep with/date the attractive guys along with the hypergamy effect during their prime years... then once their looks fade (aging) and they want to get married they will go for a successful guy that has a good personality as well. I definitely agree with that.

I've seen a lot of women directly agree with this. Looks matter A LOT when you're under 30... especially under 25. Then as you age it matters less and less while success/personality matters more.

But again, who is rating these women/men? Whenever I hear of examples of "looks mismatched" couples it's an average guy with a slightlyyy above average woman, which makes perfect sense . I very rarely see someone who's plain average with a really hot gf/wife, the times I have is when the girl was a full out gold digger.

As for the love thing... attraction is what creates that bond initially. Personality strengthens it. Once it is strengthened then looks stop mattering. Well at least in theory it should... it disgusts me when someone becomes disabled in some way and the spouse leaves them.

Depends on the study. Most use professionals that specialize in the area of human attraction that use a facial symmetry and measurement methodology, as was used in the marriage study.

I guess the biggest reason I don't really buy into the whole theory you've got is anecdotes- the girls I knew wanted to be with the interesting guys, the ones in bands, the artists, the thugs, or whatever other type of excitement a guy could provide- more so than the attractive ones. I've always done very well in dating, and I'm certainly not a model, I'm just an average looking dude. But I've got a damn good sense of humor and I know how to make a girl feel alive, so I've never really had an issue when it comes to hooking up or dating. And I've never done the bar scene or the clubs while single, but from what I've gathered they're a very different environment and draw a certain sort of person that isn't really representative of "most people."

 

[studentp0x]

Depends on the study. Most use professionals that specialize in the area of human attraction that use a facial symmetry and measurement methodology, as was used in the marriage study.

I guess the biggest reason I don't really buy into the whole theory you've got is anecdotes- the girls I knew wanted to be with the interesting guys, the ones in bands, the artists, the thugs, or whatever other type of excitement a guy could provide- more so than the attractive ones. I've always done very well in dating, and I'm certainly not a model, I'm just an average looking dude. But I've got a damn good sense of humor and I know how to make a girl feel alive, so I've never really had an issue when it comes to hooking up or dating. And I've never done the bar scene or the clubs while single, but from what I've gathered they're a very different environment and draw a certain sort of person that isn't really representative of "most people."

The only way to know how attractive someone is, is to see them in person and have many members of the opposite sex judge them. Guys cant rate guys, girls cant rate girls. Pictures are flawed since some people are very photogenic while many others like horrible in pics vs. in real life. Like literally I've seen someone go from plain average in pictures to fairly hot in person.
That's why these studies are very flawed.

If you've done well with women, you're probably a 7/10 facewise.. at least a 6/10 (average is 5/10) if you're tall and got the body too. At 7/10 you're considered pretty attractive to a solid number of women, hence why you've had success.

I used to have little success with girls and suddenly at age 18-19 there was a massive change in how girls responded to me. Sure my body got bigger and bigger but I had an attractive body even at 14 years old. Same height.. same personality. So I looked at pictures and noticed the massive change in my face. Keep in mind I was only average before and probably a 7/10 now. But it's amazing how big of a difference it makes. Suddenly girls who would have friendzoned me before now all want to hook up/date.

As for the exciting guys... thats just niches. They attract a small minority of women that are into that specific niche (ex. guys in bands, drug dealers, etc.). It may be anecdotes on the whole but end of the day most girls will tell you that face is number 1 while logic also dictates that.

 

[Seth Joo]

The only way to know how attractive someone is, is to see them in person and have many members of the opposite sex judge them. Guys cant rate guys, girls cant rate girls. Pictures are flawed since some people are very photogenic while many others like horrible in pics vs. in real life. Like literally I've seen someone go from plain average in pictures to fairly hot in person.
That's why these studies are very flawed.

If you've done well with women, you're probably a 7/10 facewise.. at least a 6/10 (average is 5/10) if you're tall and got the body too. At 7/10 you're considered pretty attractive to a solid number of women, hence why you've had success.

I used to have little success with girls and suddenly at age 18-19 there was a massive change in how girls responded to me. Sure my body got bigger and bigger but I had an attractive body even at 14 years old. Same height.. same personality. So I looked at pictures and noticed the massive change in my face. Keep in mind I was only average before and probably a 7/10 now. But it's amazing how big of a difference it makes. Suddenly girls who would have friendzoned me before now all want to hook up/date.

As for the exciting guys... thats just niches. They attract a small minority of women that are into that specific niche (ex. guys in bands, drug dealers, etc.). It may be anecdotes on the whole but end of the day most girls will tell you that face is number 1 while logic also dictates that.

Some people look good in photos and not so great in real life, and there are people who look bad in photos but great in real life.

I actually do think men can tell if other men are good looking or not, people with symmetrical facial features tend to be considered good looking.

Women tend to have a very different psychology from men, that is why guys who sometimes do not fit the profile of "good looking" can have amazing success with women, and even if most women will not admit it, money and a man's social standing is a very big factor for women, whereas its not so much with men. Its rare to see rich women with poorer men unless you are talking about some kind of cougar and younger man thing.

 

[studentp0x]

Some people look good in photos and not so great in real life, and there are people who look bad in photos but great in real life.

I actually do think men can tell if other men are good looking or not, people with symmetrical facial features tend to be considered good looking.

Women tend to have a very different psychology from men, that is why guys who sometimes do not fit the profile of "good looking" can have amazing success with women, and even if most women will not admit it, money and a man's social standing is a very big factor for women, whereas its not so much with men. Its rare to see rich women with poorer men unless you are talking about some kind of cougar and younger man thing.

Well men can yes but many times they cannot. Men can pick out the classic generic examples but not anything beyond that.

Overall that's true. Though an attractive construction worker will have far more success with attractive women than an average looking doctor.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Some people look good in photos and not so great in real life, and there are people who look bad in photos but great in real life.

I actually do think men can tell if other men are good looking or not, people with symmetrical facial features tend to be considered good looking.

Women tend to have a very different psychology from men, that is why guys who sometimes do not fit the profile of "good looking" can have amazing success with women, and even if most women will not admit it, money and a man's social standing is a very big factor for women, whereas its not so much with men. Its rare to see rich women with poorer men unless you are talking about some kind of cougar and younger man thing.

It's not that rare. In around 15% of marriages with children under 18, the woman is the primary income provider or earns more than the husband (2011 data, may even be more common now).

Honestly dude, our psychology is not that much different than yours. Women go for physical attraction as the initial factor, just as men do. You approach someone because you like how they look - human beings are visual creatures. Then, as the relationship progresses, things like personality come into play in order to form a concrete bond (if compatibility is there, obviously). For a small subset of women, social standing and money may trump other factors, but that is by no means the majority.

 

[Seth Joo]

Well men can yes but many times they cannot. Men can pick out the classic generic examples but not anything beyond that.

Overall that's true. Though an attractive construction worker will have far more success with attractive women than an average looking doctor.

Your making assumptions, a woman might sleep with the construction worker but might be married to the average Joe doctor.

A man's income and standing is extremely important for most women, a lot more than his looks or anything else. Men do not take this into consideration when looking for a woman. It is why a middle class American man will marry someone who came from a poorer background, but rarely the other way around.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Your making assumptions, a woman might sleep with the construction worker but might be married to the average Joe doctor.

A man's income and standing is extremely important for most women, a lot more than his looks or anything else. Men do not take this into consideration when looking for a woman. It is why a middle class American man will marry someone who came from a poorer background, but rarely the other way around.

Sigh.

Again, a man's income and social standing does NOT trump looks/personality/etc in the average woman, at least in America. Yes, you have the occasional starlet dating the rich old guy, but that is a minority. I understand this may be different in some Asian countries, but you can't apply one culture to everything.

 

[touchpause13]

Your making assumptions, a woman might sleep with the construction worker but might be married to the average Joe doctor.

A man's income and standing is extremely important for most women, a lot more than his looks or anything else. Men do not take this into consideration when looking for a woman. It is why a middle class American man will marry someone who came from a poorer background, but rarely the other way around.

Bull

Looks/personality are always going to be the first consideration apart from those who are looking to marry solely for money (these are the minority). And coming from a poorer background doesn't really matter IMO. I'd rather be with someone from a poorer background who has drive and ambition than someone who is lazy and rich.

Not sure why anyone would take dating advice from the guy who says love is super rare anyways

 

[studentp0x]

@touchpause13 @WhtsThFrequency Can we add that looks matter more than personality though? In terms of ranking that is.

 

[touchpause13]

@touchpause13 @WhtsThFrequency Can we add that looks matter more than personality though? In terms of ranking that is.

my thought is that looks are the first thing you see. If a person doesn't pass the looks test they aren't going to get a chance to move on to the personality test. That being said, looks aren't going to make up for a crappy personality. I also think that personality can bump someone from like a 6 to an 8. My scale is <5 I would not F, >5 I would F.

 

[studentp0x]

Your making assumptions, a woman might sleep with the construction worker but might be married to the average Joe doctor.

A man's income and standing is extremely important for most women, a lot more than his looks or anything else. Men do not take this into consideration when looking for a woman. It is why a middle class American man will marry someone who came from a poorer background, but rarely the other way around.

The former part could commonly be true yes.
But on the whole income/social class dont matter too much. The important part is that is helps you within your league. Your league is determined by your face largely... and I guess for men in their 30s and 40s body matters even more since your average guy is out of shape and hence much less attractive on the whole.

Look at it this way... there's a reason rich men are fighting over girls on sugar daddy sites. If money/success attracted women THAT much then they could just go out, meet people and land a hot gf who wasnt being directly paid by them.

 

[studentp0x]

my thought is that looks are the first thing you see. If a person doesn't pass the looks test they aren't going to get a chance to move on to the personality test. That being said, looks aren't going to make up for a crappy personality.

Yea I think that an 8/10 face with an average decent personality (so not a crappy one but not an amazing one either) will trump an average looking guy who has a terrific personality. That's my view on girls anyway. If I dont like their personality then i wont be interested after i get to know them. But if i dont like their face then there will be zero interest to begin with. And that's exactly how women think too.

 

[touchpause13]

Yea I think that an 8/10 face with an average decent personality (so not a crappy one but not an amazing one either) will trump an average looking guy who has a terrific personality. That's my view on girls anyway. If I dont like their personality then i wont be interested after i get to know them. But if i dont like their face then there will be zero interest to begin with. And that's exactly how women think too.

I'd rather have a 6 with a great personality than am 8 with an average/poor personality. I think a lot of that is probably personal preference. I do agree completely about the face thing. If your mug looks jacked, do not pass go, do not collect $200

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

@touchpause13 @WhtsThFrequency Can we add that looks matter more than personality though? In terms of ranking that is.

Well, look are definitely the initial attractor. But in terms of absolute value? It depends a lot on what you are looking for. If you're looking for a fling or casual dating, then looks are more likely to trump personality. If you are looking for a long-term relationship and/or marriage, personality may well be more important. I don't really think you can assign them rungs on a ladder.

 

[studentp0x]

Well by "rankings" I'm talking about general importance on the whole. A 4/10 guy can't use an above average personality to get with a nice cute girl when her options include a guy who's an 8/10 that also has an 8/10 personality etc. Basically in the real world/long run your looks will matter the most and you guys basically agree anyways.

My idea is face > personality > body > height > money/success/ambition. This is assuming that the person is taller than the woman and has moderate ambition.

Interesting enough I find that men who are slightly older (above 25 and into their 30s+) tend to acknowledge the importance of looks far more than younger guys do. In high school everyone thinks it's all about "game" and this continues until about the mid 20s when guys begin to realize that dating success is a byproduct of your attractiveness.

 

[Seth Joo]

Sigh.

Again, a man's income and social standing does NOT trump looks/personality/etc in the average woman, at least in America. Yes, you have the occasional starlet dating the rich old guy, but that is a minority. I understand this may be different in some Asian countries, but you can't apply one culture to everything.

Women tend to have a much broader definition of what is sexually attractive to them, they look at so many different factor when choosing a mate.

Being a good looking guy does not hurt, but if you are broke, chances are its going to be uphill to have healthy long term relationships with women. Good looking guys will get one night stands, not real relationships with emotional depth.

A guy can look like an Abercrombie and Fitch model, but if he is unemployed or has a serious mental problem, most women will overlook him very quickly.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Women tend to have a much broader definition of what is sexually attractive to them, they look at so many different factor when choosing a mate.

Being a good looking guy does not hurt, but if you are broke, chances are its going to be uphill to have healthy long term relationships with women. Good looking guys will get one night stands, not real relationships with emotional depth.

A guy can look like an Abercrombie and Fitch model, but if he is unemployed or has a serious mental problem, most women will overlook him very quickly.

I think you're selling men short here.

And also selling good-looking guys short.

Also, you are using extremes to try and make your point. Of course someone broke, unemployed, or with serious mental problems will have trouble dating. That does not mean women care more about money/prestige than looks or personality.

 

[studentp0x]

Women tend to have a much broader definition of what is sexually attractive to them, they look at so many different factor when choosing a mate.

Being a good looking guy does not hurt, but if you are broke, chances are its going to be uphill to have healthy long term relationships with women. Good looking guys will get one night stands, not real relationships with emotional depth.

A guy can look like an Abercrombie and Fitch model, but if he is unemployed or has a serious mental problem, most women will overlook him very quickly.

An 8/10 construction worker with an average personality will have a much much easier time dating attractive non-gold digger girls than an average looking rich successful guy.

You have to realize that looks matter more for guys than they do for women. Most girls can come off as fairly attractive just by being in shape, putting on clothing and dressing the "right" way. They'll have guys all over them most of the time. As a guy though being in shape and dressing nice wont get you anywhere if your face isn't above average in attractiveness.
Also I very often see guys dating less attractive woman than them and pretty much never see the opposite.

I think what you need to realize is that girls only care about your career, ambitions, hobbies, success etc. if they're attracted to your face. You can be an olympic gold medalist who's also a neurosurgeon and a CEO but the most you'll get is a "oh wow nice!" if they arent attracted to your face. But if they are attracted to your face, just finishing grad school will be more impressive to them than all of the above (in a way).
Even with gold diggers, they're only impressed by what comes with your high paying career. No ones gonna pursue a doctor for his money if he drives a ford and lives in a so-so house. They want the sports car driving guy who owns a small mansion (at minimum). As for status, it only matters at the extreme ends (ex. professional athlete). You cant obtain any sort of special status through school unless you become a top end CEO or something. Medicine doesnt carry any special status with it.

 

[Seth Joo]

An 8/10 construction worker with an average personality will have a much much easier time dating attractive non-gold digger girls than an average looking rich successful guy.

You have to realize that looks matter more for guys than they do for women. Most girls can come off as fairly attractive just by being in shape, putting on clothing and dressing the "right" way. They'll have guys all over them most of the time. As a guy though being in shape and dressing nice wont get you anywhere if your face isn't above average in attractiveness.
Also I very often see guys dating less attractive woman than them and pretty much never see the opposite.

I think what you need to realize is that girls only care about your career, ambitions, hobbies, success etc. if they're attracted to your face. You can be an olympic gold medalist who's also a neurosurgeon and a CEO but the most you'll get is a "oh wow nice!" if they arent attracted to your face. But if they are attracted to your face, just finishing grad school will be more impressive to them than all of the above (in a way).
Even with gold diggers, they're only impressed by what comes with your high paying career. No ones gonna pursue a doctor for his money if he drives a ford and lives in a so-so house. They want the sports car driving guy who owns a small mansion (at minimum). As for status, it only matters at the extreme ends (ex. professional athlete). You cant obtain any sort of special status through school unless you become a top end CEO or something. Medicine doesnt carry any special status with money.

Medicine does not carry special status? I think most doctors tend to earn a comfortable living, also there is something about someone who has the training and education to save your life.

That being said, women are a lot more complicated when it comes to choosing a mate than men.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Daniel Craig is BUTT UGLY but managed to become an international sex symbol as James Bond. The man has thinning hair, he is much shorter than other Bond actors, yet many women think he is gorgeous.

I posted an article which had Hugh Jackman standing right next to Craig, the contrast between Craig and Jackman is like night and day. Quite a few female friends saw it and agreed.

Jeez. Just because you think he is "BUTT UGLY" doesn't mean that everyone does. There is this wonderful thing called personal preference.

 

[studentp0x]

Daniel Craig is BUTT UGLY but managed to become an international sex symbol as James Bond. The man has thinning hair, he is much shorter than other Bond actors, yet many women think he is gorgeous.

I posted an article which had Hugh Jackman standing right next to Craig, the contrast between Craig and Jackman is like night and day. Quite a few female friends saw it and agreed.

He has a unique look and he's an actor in a unique role. You cant use celebrities to judge anything, they are exempt.
Focus on daily life average people... you'll pretty much never see someone who's even average let alone ugly with a really hot girl (barring the exceptions I pointed out)
Also dont forget about niches... a minority of women can be into a certain niche/specific look. Guys fitting that profile are also exempt. why? cause most guys look pretty ordinary whether they're average or handsome.

 

[Seth Joo]

Jeez. Just because you think he is "BUTT UGLY" doesn't mean that everyone does. There is this wonderful thing called personal preference.

Actually there are lot of people who do think Craig is ugly. I believe he is very popular as Bond because he tends to a "normal guy". There seems to be a pattern when regular guys play extraordinary characters in the movies these days.

Several of the Bond actors worked as models before getting into acting including Roger Moore and Sean Connery. Both of them had striking features as young men.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Actually there are lot of people who do think Craig is ugly. I believe he is very popular as Bond because he tends to a "normal guy". There seems to be a pattern when regular guys play extraordinary characters in the movies these days.

You need to work on your reading comprehension.

I said your assertion that is he undeniably ugly is incorrect because some people do find him attractive. I.e. you are projecting your opinion as reality. I made no mention of the proportion of people who do or do not.

 

[Seth Joo]

You need to work on your reading comprehension.

I said your assertion that is he undeniably ugly is incorrect because some people do find him attractive. I.e. you are projecting your opinion as reality. I made no mention of the proportion of people who do or do not.

Well I guess the idea of beauty is very subjective. Craig worked out to build a very muscular physique which he tends to show a lot of in the movies.

The mesomorphic body that he has seems to make up for his shorter stature and lack of classic good looks. I think his Bond films are too gritty.

Jackman is perfect, good looking and handsome, and tall and muscular.

 

[studentp0x]

Well I guess the idea of beauty is very subjective. Craig worked out to build a very muscular physique which he tends to show a lot of in the movies.

The mesomorphic body that he has seems to make up for his shorter stature and lack of classic good looks. I think his Bond films are too gritty.

Jackman is perfect, good looking and handsome, and tall and muscular.

Forget about celebs lol. Focus on 99.9% of the population. What ultimately matters is your face. You can be 5'7 in average shape, making 20$ an hour and you'll get more women than any tall, rich, jacked guy if you have a 9/10 face.
Never have looks mattered this much for men ever in history as they do now in western society. Women now make their own money and arent as dependent on men.This eliminates the whole money/career thing.
Next, with social media women have seen it all and have gotten attention from all sorts of men.. As such their standards have gone up.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Well I guess the idea of beauty is very subjective. Craig worked out to build a very muscular physique which he tends to show a lot of in the movies.

The mesomorphic body that he has seems to make up for his shorter stature and lack of classic good looks. I think his Bond films are too gritty.

Jackman is perfect, good looking and handsome, and tall and muscular.

It IS very subjective. For example, I actually DO think Craig has "classic" good looks - he's much better than all the pretty boys you see nowadays (e.g. Channing Tatum and stuff like that). He also carries himself (in real life) with more poise and maturity than a lot of guys. And he's not short anyway, he's 5'10'. That is average height.

I find Jackman quite generic-looking. I mean yes, he's objectively attractive, but there is nothing about him that makes me want to jump his bones.

Anyway, we could debate this on and on, but fact of the matter is, there is a lot of variation in what people find attractive and just because women are attracted to someone whom YOU don't find attractive doesn't mean they value prestige and money over looks.

 

[Seth Joo]

It IS very subjective. For example, I actually DO think Craig has "classic" good looks - he's much better than all the pretty boys you see nowadays (e.g. Channing Tatum and stuff like that). He also carries himself (in real life) with more poise and maturity than a lot of guys. And he's not short anyway, he's 5'10'. That is average height.

I find Jackman quite generic-looking. I mean yes, he's objectively attractive, but there is nothing about him that makes me want to jump his bones.

Anyway, we could debate this on and on, but fact of the matter is, there is a lot of variation in what people find attractive and just because women are attracted to someone whom YOU don't find attractive doesn't mean they value prestige and money over looks.

Whatever. Most of the women I know would say Jackman is the better looking of the two. Craig attracted a ton of controversy when it was announced that he would portray James Bond.

Craig is short compared to the other Bond actors.

I thought Sean Connery was the best looking 007 when he was portraying the movies in the 60s. Pierce Brosnan was also looking good, although he looked too skinny in Goldeneye, the opposite of Craig, Brosnan had good looks, but was very skinny in his first film, a lot of people laughed when he took his shirt off and he had skinny arms.

I do not think Jackman is "generic" in any way except for that he portrayed Wolverine too much.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

So in the end we agree. Personal preference is a strong factor in attractiveness.